Informed by Peplau’s theory of roles, this study examined the complex interplay between spouses’ gender role attitudes and wives’ employment status as a predictor of Mexican-origin husbands’ marital satisfaction. Dissonance between spouses’ gender role attitudes toward marital roles and wives’ employment status within couples was hypothesized to be inversely related to husbands’ marital satisfaction. Data were gathered during in-home interviews with 120 Mexican-origin couples living in North Carolina. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses identified a three-way interaction between wives’ employment and spouses’ gender role attitudes, indicating that in couples with nonemployed wives, wives’ more sex-typed gender role attitudes were more negatively associated with the marital satisfaction of husbands with more sex-typed attitudes than husbands with less sex-typed attitudes. Specifically, the three-way interaction showed that for couples with nonemployed wives, husbands’ marital satisfaction was lowest in marital contexts in which both spouses endorsed more sex-typed gender role attitudes.
AdamsM.ColtraneS.ParkeR. D. (2007). Cross-ethnic applicability of the gender-based attitudes toward marriage and child rearing scales. Sex Roles, 56, 325-339.
2.
AikenS. G.WestL. S. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. London, England: Sage.
3.
AmatoP. R.BoothA. (1995). Changes in gender role attitudes and perceived marital quality. American Sociological Review, 60, 58-66.
4.
ArciniegaG. M.AndersonT. C.Tovar-BlankZ. G.TraceyT. J. G. (2008). Toward a fuller conception of machismo: Development of a traditional machismo and caballerismo scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55, 19-33.
5.
Baca ZinnM. (1980). Gender and ethnic identity among Chicanos. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 5, 18-24.
6.
BacallaoM. L.SmokowskiP. R. (2007). The costs of getting ahead: Mexican family system changes after immigration. Family Relations, 56, 52-66.
7.
BakerP. L. (2004). “It is the only way I can survive”: Gender paradox among recent Mexican immigrants to Iowa. Sociological Perspectives, 47, 393-408.
8.
BoothA.JohnsonD. R.WhiteL.EdwardsJ. N. (1984). Women, outside employment, and marital instability. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 567-583.
9.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
CampbellJ. L.SnowB. M. (1992). Gender role conflict and family environment as predictors of men’s marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 6, 84-87.
11.
CasasJ. M.OrtizS. (1985). Exploring the applicability of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale for assessing level of marital adjustment with Mexican Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 1023-1027.
12.
CauceA. M.Domenech-RodriguezM. (2002). Latino families: Myths and realities. In ContrerasJ.KernsK.Neal-BarnettA. (Eds.), Latino children and families in the United States: Current research and future directions (pp. 3-25). Westport, CT: Praeger.
13.
CervantesJ. M. (2006). A new understanding of the macho male image: Exploration of the Mexican-American man. In Englar-CarlsonM.StevensM. A. (Eds.), In the room with men: A casebook of therapeutic change (pp. 197-224). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
14.
Chavira-PradoA. (1992). Work, health, and the family: Gender structure and women’s status in an undocumented migrant population. Human Organization, 51, 53-64.
15.
ClearyP. D.MechanicD. (1983). Sex differences in psychological distress among married people. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 111-121.
16.
De VosS. (1999). Comment of coding marital status in Latin America. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 30, 79-93.
17.
EsteinouR. (2007). Strengths and challenges of Mexican families in the 21st century. Marriage & Family Review, 41, 37-41.
18.
FalconierM. K. (2013). Traditional gender role orientation and dyadic coping in immigrant Latino couples: Effects on couple functioning. Family Relations, 62, 269-283.
19.
Félix-OrtizM.AbreuJ. M.BrianoM.BowenD. (2001). A critique of machismo measures in psychological research. In ColumbusF. (Ed.), Advances in psychology research (Vol. III, pp. 63-90). Huntington, NY: Nova Science.
20.
Fernandez KellyM. P. (1992). Delicate transactions: Gender, home, and employment among Hispanic women. In GinsburgF.Lowenhaupt TsingA. (Eds.), Uncertain terms (pp. 183-198). Boston. MA: Beacon Press.
21.
FragaL. R.GarciaJ. A.HeroR. E.Jones-CorreaM.Martinez-EbersV.SeguraG. M. (2012). Latinos in the new millennium: An almanac of opinion, behavior, and policy preferences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
GrzywaczJ. G.RaoP.GentryA.MarínA.ArcuryT. A. (2009). Acculturation and conflict in Mexican immigrants’ intimate partnerships: The role of women’s labor force participation. Violence Against Women, 15, 1194-1212.
24.
HelmsH. M.SuppleA. J.ProulxC. M. (2011). Mexican-origin couples in the early years of parenthood: Marital well-being in ecological context. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 3, 67-95.
25.
HelmsH. M.WallsJ. K.CrouterA. C.McHaleS. M. (2010). Provider role attitudes, marital satisfaction, role overload, and housework: A dyadic approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 24, 568-577.
26.
HoffmanL. W.KloskaD. D. (1995). Parents’ gender-based attitudes toward marital roles and child rearing: Development and validation of new measures. Sex Roles, 32, 273-295.
27.
Hondagneu-SoteloP. (1992). Overcoming patriarchal constraints: The reconstruction of gender relations among Mexican immigrant women and men. Gender & Society, 6, 393-415.
28.
HustonT. L. (2000). The social ecology of marriage and other intimate unions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 298-319.
29.
HustonT. L.McHaleS. M.CrouterA. C. (1986). When the honeymoon’s over: Changes in the marriage relationship over the first year. In GilmourR.DuckS. (Eds.), The emerging field of personal relationships (pp. 109-132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31.
KurdekL.SchmittJ. P. (1986). Relationship quality of partners in heterosexual married, heterosexual cohabiting, and gay and lesbian relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 711-720.
32.
LedermannT.MachoS.KennyD. A. (2011). Assessing mediation in dyadic data using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. Structural Equation Modeling, 18, 595-612.
33.
LiJ. T.CaldwellR. A. (1987). Magnitude and directional effects of marital sex-role incongruence on marital adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 8, 97-110.
34.
LittleT.D.BovairdJ. A.WidamanK. F. (2006). On the merits of orthogonalizing powered and product terms: Implications for modeling interactions among latent variables. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 497-519.
35.
MarkidesK. S.Roberts-JollyJ.RayL. A.HoppeS. K.RudkinL. (1999). Changes in marital satisfaction in three generations of Mexican Americans. Research on Aging, 21, 36-45.
36.
McHaleS. M.CrouterA. C. (1992). You can’t always get what you want: Incongruence between sex-role attitudes and family work roles and its implications for marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 537-547.
37.
MinnotteK. L.MinnotteM. C.PedersenD. E.MannonS. E.KigerG. (2010). His and her perspectives: Gender ideology, work-to-family conflict, and marital satisfaction. Sex Roles, 63, 425-438.
38.
MontezJ. K.AngelJ. L.AngelR. J. (2009). Employment, marriage, and inequality in health insurance for Mexican-origin women. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 50, 132-148.
39.
PardoY.WeisfeldC.HillE.SlatcherR. B. (2013). Machismo and marital satisfaction in Mexican American couples. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 44, pp. 257-273.
40.
ParradoE. A.FlippenC. A. (2005). Migration and gender among Mexican women. American Sociological Review, 70, 606-632.
41.
PenalosaF. (1968). Mexican family roles. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 30, 680-689.
42.
PeplauL. A. (1983). Roles and Gender. In KelleyH. H.BerscheidE.ChristensenA.HarveyJ. H.HustonT. L.LevingerG.Peterson . . . D. (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 220-264). New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
43.
Perry-JenkinsM.CrouterA. C. (1990). Men’s provider-role attitudes: Implications for household work and marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Issues, 2, 136-156.
44.
PhillipsJ. A.SweeneyM. M. (2005). Premarital cohabitation and marital disruption among White, Black, and Mexican American women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 296-314.
45.
PykeK.AdamsM. (2010). What’s age got to do with it? A case study analysis of power and gender in husband-older marriages. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 748-777.
46.
RodriguezY.HengstebeckN.HelmsH. M.WoodC. (2013, November). The socioeconomic, cultural, and family experiences of Mexican immigrant parents in North Carolina at the advent of the Great Recession. In HelmsH. M. (Organizer), Mexican American Families: Family Relationships in Established and Emerging Immigrant Communities. Symposium presented at the National Council on Family Relations Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX, USA.
47.
RhyneD. (1981). Bases of marital satisfaction among men and women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 941-955.
48.
RossC. E.MirowskyJ.UlbrichP. (1983). Distress and the traditional female role: A comparison of Mexicans and Anglos. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 670-682.
49.
SchoenR.RogersS. J.AmatoP. R. (2006). Wives’ employment and spouses’ marital happiness: Assessing the direction of influence using longitudinal couple data. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 506-528.
50.
UpdegraffK. A.CrouterA. C.Umaña-TaylorA.CanslerE. (2007). Work-family linkages in the lives of families of Mexican origin. In LansfordJ. E.Deater-DeckardK.BornsteinM. (Eds.), Immigrant families (pp. 250-267). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
51.
VannoyD.PhilliberW. W. (1992). Wife’s employment and quality of marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 387-398.
52.
WheelerL. A.UpdegraffK. A.ThayerS. M. (2010). Conflict resolution in Mexican-origin couples: Culture, gender, and marital quality. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 991-1005.
53.
YucelD. (2012). Wives’ employment and marital dissolution: Consideration of gender ideology and marital interaction. Sociology Mind, 2, 213-222.
